Titles are hard

RSS

rightnowbb:

gli-tor-is:

rightnowbb:

hey mainstream feminism

call me a maverick but i think we could do better at analysing the intersection of intellectual ableism with misogyny than just a load of neurotypical women complaining that ‘a woman’s IQ is more important than her bra size!’ and ‘little girls are taught it’s more important to be pretty than clever.’

those things are still completely valid tho. conversations about intersectionality can occur without our having to shut down important conversations that are already happening.

But those conversations are the only ones relating to femaleness and intelligence that are regularly heard in mainstream feminism, and they are very shallow and incomplete analyses.

Yes, girls are taught it’s more important to be pretty than clever, and yes, they shouldn’t be taught that they are only valuable on basis of their beauty— but nor should they be taught that they owe people either a certain level of cleverness, or a certain output from their cleverness. Girls—people in general—are not defined by their grades, nor their value in the job market, any more than they are defined by their appearance. Girls should not be taught to judge one another or expected to be judged on basis of appearance, but nor should they be taught that a person is any less worthy of respect if they lack mental skill in a particular area.

Girls shouldn’t be taught to market themselves based on their bodies, or on basis of their brains. They should be taught to recognise themselves as having intrinsic, immeasurable worth; as a human being and not as a commodity.

And it’s important to deconstruct the whole concept of intelligence and the idea that any person, or group of people, is superior on basis of it. There are people with high IQ’s whose ability to function in society is low and who are perceived as “stupid”. There are people with low IQ’s who have incredible mental skill in a few areas. Perceived intelligence is highly linked to class, race and gender. “General intelligence” is nonsense for a great number of people, and can be incredibly harmful in dehumanising people with perceived low “general intelligence”, or pressurising people with perceived high “general intelligence” to do things which are impossible for them due to disability or other factors.

And as for “the size of a woman’s IQ is more important than the size of her bra!”—well yeah, it is. In that intellectually disabled women are often institutionalised, suffer institutional abuse, assault, gaslighting, dehumanisation, denial of basic human rights…….and no woman has ever encountered these things just for having small boobs.

Also, while it’s easy to say that looks don’t matter and shouldn’t matter if you happen to vaguely fit conventional standards of beauty anyway; for many women who don’t fit those conventional standards (due to being physically disabled, “deformed”, very fat, very dark skinned, very hirstute etc.), learning to find themselves beautiful and promote the idea that they are beautiful IS a meaningful act.

This is not less valid.

Promoting body diversity and body positivity and finding all bodies beautiful, is not less valid than doing the same for minds. It’s a different area to focus on; it’s not wrong, or inconsequential, or lesser.

As I say, no woman should feel the need to market herself as a product for other people’s consumption.

But it is valid for a woman to take joy and pride in her own mental skills and her own appearance—especially, it is valuable to do those things if those aspects of her are conventionally devalued, ignored or denigrated.

Focussing on appearance in this regard is not lesser.

gli-tor-is:

rightnowbb:

hey mainstream feminism

call me a maverick but i think we could do better at analysing the intersection of intellectual ableism with misogyny than just a load of neurotypical women complaining that ‘a woman’s IQ is more important than her bra size!’ and ‘little girls are taught it’s more important to be pretty than clever.’

those things are still completely valid tho. conversations about intersectionality can occur without our having to shut down important conversations that are already happening.

But those conversations are the only ones relating to femaleness and intelligence that are regularly heard in mainstream feminism, and they are very shallow and incomplete analyses.

Yes, girls are taught it’s more important to be pretty than clever, and yes, they shouldn’t be taught that they are only valuable on basis of their beauty— but nor should they be taught that they owe people either a certain level of cleverness, or a certain output from their cleverness. Girls—people in general—are not defined by their grades, nor their value in the job market, any more than they are defined by their appearance. Girls should not be taught to judge one another or expected to be judged on basis of appearance, but nor should they be taught that a person is any less worthy of respect if they lack mental skill in a particular area.

Girls shouldn’t be taught to market themselves based on their bodies, or on basis of their brains. They should be taught to recognise themselves as having intrinsic, immeasurable worth; as a human being and not as a commodity.

And it’s important to deconstruct the whole concept of intelligence and the idea that any person, or group of people, is superior on basis of it. There are people with high IQ’s whose ability to function in society is low and who are perceived as “stupid”. There are people with low IQ’s who have incredible mental skill in a few areas. Perceived intelligence is highly linked to class, race and gender. “General intelligence” is nonsense for a great number of people, and can be incredibly harmful in dehumanising people with perceived low “general intelligence”, or pressurising people with perceived high “general intelligence” to do things which are impossible for them due to disability or other factors.

And as for “the size of a woman’s IQ is more important than the size of her bra!”—well yeah, it is. In that intellectually disabled women are often institutionalised, suffer institutional abuse, assault, gaslighting, dehumanisation, denial of basic human rights…….and no woman has ever encountered these things just for having small boobs.

rightnowbb:

and hey tumblr feminism

mentally disabled people can be clever

the concept of intelligence is fundamentally flawed but maybe you could discuss that idea in relation to oppressive academic institutions and the education system, rather than use it to attack anyone who takes pride in their mental skills, pretend that it’s as simple as “clever” and “not clever”, and anybody who is clever and knows it, is not a victim of ableism.

non exhaustive list of ableism in tumblr feminism

*NB: this is, as i say NON EXHAUSTIVE, and I am talking about mental disabilities because that’s the only thing i feel even vaguely qualified to say anything about (and even then, big gaps in my experience and I’m going half off things I’ve read from other bloggers). if you have anything to add re: physical disabilities etc, feel free to add to this. I do NOT claim to represent the entire problem, just things that I’ve observed so far; there is much more to this*

-accusing MRA’s of having down’s syndrome, being autistic or being dropped as a baby etc.

-reference to sexist men having no social skills, living in mom’s basement etc.

-generally mocking people for lack of social skills

-mocking people for taking things literally which were not meant to be taken literally

-mocking or shouting at people for not understanding complex/abstract things like oppressive structures

-assuming that these people are not negatively affected by oppressive structures, simply because they cannot understand them

-mocking or shouting at people for not understanding terms

-mocking or shouting at people for not using 100% perfect language

-shouting at people for misunderstanding social cues

-speaking for intellectually disabled people on issues such as, if “stupid” is acceptable and so on (issues which are still hotly debated and by no means certain within the anti-ableism community, never mind NT feminists deciding they’ve got the vote on this)

-allowing no points to be considered unless they are worded absolutely perfectly

-assuming that disabled people are unable to speak for themselves, so abled feminists have to speak for them

-appropriating disabled narratives to make them about other issues

-appropriating ableism in general as a mere facet of other forms of oppression

-emphasis on “bad social skills” as something inherently oppressive

-pride in any mental skill apart from social skills, taken as elitist and snobby

-use of the word “unintelligent” as a supposedly preferable alternative to “stupid”

-myth of “overall intelligence” perpetuated or at least not commonly challenged.

-NT people who just can’t be bothered to think critically/empathise/fact check, calling ableism when somebody calls them out on that

-NT people not caring about or mentioning ableism until they can use it to yell at someone they don’t like

-ableism left out of every oppression list—e.g. “cis het white male” being taken as code for “privileged in literally every way”, etc.

-“intent isn’t magic”

-no accommodation made for different people’s needs and abilities in regard to the necessity for media criticism etc.

-no accommodation made for different needs and abilities in regard to demands for new words being implemented.

-posts about ableism get relatively very few notes compared with posts about sexism, heterosexism etc.

-posts about body positivity for visibly disabled people get few notes 

-posts about relatively normative people having complicated relationships with their bodies, get many notes compared with posts about neurodivergent people having complicated relationships with their minds.

-overuse of buzzwords makes communities inaccessible to some autistic people

-disabled people continually dying due to ableism or ableism-classism combination, tumblr gives no shits.

-requirement for people to have good social skills, normative use of humour and physical attractiveness before they are listened to.

-photographing people without consent.

rightnowbb:

mainstream feminism and tumblr feminism are both so fuckign ableist

if you don’t see any problem with tumblr feminism then i have a problem with you tbh.

mainstream feminism and tumblr feminism are both so fuckign ableist

lovesexdevotion:

That was so beautiful

lovesexdevotion:

That was so beautiful

(Source: johto-jordan)

(Source: mrgolightly)

if you’re going to make posts about whether a person is attractive or not, maybe instead you could just not do that.

given that your judgement extends to everybody who even looks like the person in question.

kittyit:

kinda fucked up how society teaches that “it’s not fair” is a whiny and childish emotional response to have. what a good way to gloss over the fact that things need to change until they are fair & that distress is a valid emotional response to injustice